Oyster Auto Top-Up

Keith Prince: In the light of your decision to make TfL ticket machines cashless, will you reduce the minimum Oyster Auto top-up from £20 to £10?

Sadiq Khan: The current minimum auto top-up amount of £20 was set for technical reasons. It ensures customers will always have sufficient credit to cover some of the longer-distance journeys possible on the network covered by Oyster such as from Reading or from Gatwick and reduces the risk of customers not paying the correct fare. However, I can see that some customers might benefit from being able to top up less each time. I know TfL was recently contacted by London TravelWatch on this issue and will be meeting to explore this further.
As the AssemblyMember is aware, TfL has recently decided not to proceed at this time with its proposal to temporarily remove cash payments at those stations that are still accepting them. While the coronavirus transmission rate is high and passenger numbers remain low, TfL will maintain the temporary cashless arrangements in place and get machines at other London Underground (LU) and Docklands Light Railway (DLR) stations and at London Overground and TfL Rail ticket offices as these arrangements are generally working well.
The decision to pause the wider rollout follows engagement throughout November and December [2020] and I want to thank everyone, including AssemblyMembers, for their insights and questions, which have helped TfL further understand how the proposals might affect people, especially in the current context.
TfL will keep under review what the appropriate payment options should be on the network as the way people pay for their travel continues to change. This may include looking again at the role of cash payments in the future as there has been a significant reduction in the number of people using cash over the years. The feedback TfL got from this exercise will help to shape any future proposals. TfL will continue to monitor the situation, respond to any concerns raised and keep stakeholders updated on any further changes.

Keith Prince: Thank you, MrMayor. That was very helpful. It was following a discussion with [London] TravelWatch. They asked me to raise the question and so credit to them. Credit to you and the team for recognising that there are limitations on where you can go cashless, although I understand the reasons for wanting to go cashless.
I would re-emphasise that at this moment in time, if there is not the technological barrier that there was previously on the amount of top-up, if you could reduce it to £10, it would really help and probably would encourage even more people to take that route in using the Oyster card.

Sadiq Khan: Yes. Chair, to reassure the Member, I have seen the letter London TravelWatch wrote to the Commissioner [of TfL]. They make some really good points in the letter. I am sure they shared it with you as well. TfL is planning some changes to the way auto top-up works. To give you the reassurance I am sure you are looking for, TfL is exploring the feasibility of a new £10 top-up option as part of this.
Chair, I agree to keep the Member in the loop and I will keep all of the Assembly in the loop because other Members, I am sure, will be keen to get progress on this.

Keith Prince: Thank you.

Vaccine roll-out

Onkar Sahota: How is the coronavirus vaccine roll-out impacting the rate of infection in London?

Sadiq Khan: The vaccine rollout across the country is providing hope and a much-needed light at the end of the tunnel. The rollout of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines is vitally important to protect those at highest risk of infection, hospitalisation and death from COVID-19. It is an incredible scientific achievement that with the Moderna vaccine available from the spring, we will have three vaccines in the United Kingdom (UK) that are proven to be safe and effective in protecting us against this deadly virus.
The emergence of the new variant has meant we have to get the virus back under control in London and I have called for the Government to rapidly accelerate the vaccine rollout and ensure that at least 2million people a week are vaccinated nationally. This is the only way to meet the Government’s target of vaccinating the top four prioritisation groups by mid-February and will allow us to rapidly protect our most vulnerable and those who care for them, lift the burden on our NHS and ensure the country can begin to recover.
Thanks to the hard work of our brilliant NHS staff, more than 450,000 people in London have received their first dose of the vaccine so far. These numbers are increasing every day and they need to.
However, I was concerned that Londoners had initially received only a tenth of the vaccines that have been given across the country. The Minister for Vaccine Deployment, NadhimZahawi [MP], has assured me that supply and distribution will increase and I expect to see a proportionate increase in the number of vaccinations in London this week and next week. We will of course be monitoring this closely and working to ensure London gets its fair share of the vaccine.
We are yet to have full data on the impact of the vaccine on transmission and we do not yet know how new strains of COVID-19 will respond to the vaccines. We must remember that the vaccine is not a silver bullet. The new variant of the virus is spreading quickly and our NHS is under severe pressure right now. The best way for all of us to reduce the rate of transmission in our communities, protect the NHS and save lives is to stick to the lockdown restrictions.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you, MrMayor, for that very comprehensive answer. As you will know, on 4February [2021] we have a Plenary Session on vaccinations and, hopefully, the Minister for Vaccine Deployment will take up the invitation to come to the London Assembly because I know Londoners will want to ask a lot of questions of him on behalf of the Government and also to make sure that London gets a fair deal. Hopefully, the Minister will take this up.
You will note that London has the lowest vaccination rate and that may very well be because we have not had a proper proportion of the supply, but in addition to that the other risk of course is hesitancy, particularly as we know that 50% of the BAME community in this country lives in London.
What has the Minister been doing to work with local authorities to make sure that we address hesitancy and that we get the message across to communities to ensure that the take-up of the vaccine is at the level we need?

Sadiq Khan: I want to place on record my thanks to NadhimZahawi [MP] in relation to the work he is doing in this area. I have spoken to him now on a number of occasions. He is approachable. He is engaging. He understands the issue. He really is trying to get on top of this issue of rollout. It is really important that if he can - and we appreciate the time constraints - he does come to the session because hopefully then he will be able to reassure you that he appears to have a grip on some of the logistical challenges. This will be the biggest vaccination everyone has taken in our country’s history. I am trying my best to work with him collegiately on a cross-party basis. He has been listening to some of the concerns that we expressed to him and I am meeting today NHS leaders to see if we have managed to address some of the concerns we highlighted last week.
There are two big issues. One is the supply of the vaccine and the other is how it is distributed. I was this week in Wembley in Brent where a further mass vaccination centre reopened. There will be GPs, pharmacies, hospitals and mass vaccination centres doing the rollout.
You are spot on in relation to your concern that I have as well about hesitancy. There are Londoners who are hesitant about receiving the vaccine, even though they are eligible to do so. The bad news is that it is those who have suffered most because of this virus and who need the vaccine the most who are the most hesitant. That is why I would ask you, DrSahota, as somebody who is respected by your patients and by your local community, to continue to speak up about how vaccines over the course of our history have saved millions of lives and how this vaccine has gone through a proper, robust regulatory process and is the gamechanger in relation to saving lives going forward.

Onkar Sahota: Yes, thank you, MrMayor, also for all the work you have done. I of course will continue to work along with you and your office to get this message across.
The other important thing is that we are about to open a 24-hour vaccination centre; London is testing them out. You will join me in paying credit to all the NHS staff for how hard they have worked as we are going through this crisis, the way the staff have stretched themselves, their dedication, their commitment and all the wonderful work they are doing in the NHS.
Having 24-hour centres will put extra pressure on the NHS staff. Do you think that we can staff those centres? Will they be contributing towards our vaccination rates?

Sadiq Khan: You raise a really important issue here. We have to recognise that the NHS is a 365-days-a-year, 24-hours-a-day, seven-day service. Most people who work in the NHS already work ridiculous hours. I am really worried about the increasing number of NHS workers I am speaking to who are stretched and who are strained and who are really struggling because of the pressures being put upon them. I have little doubt that many of the NHS workers, particularly in intensive care units (ICUs) and high-dependency units, on the front line are traumatised. Many may be suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. We have to support them.
That is why it is really important that if you are eligible for a vaccine you take it because it alleviates the pressure on the NHS. If you follow the lockdown rules, it leads to fewer people getting the virus.
The reason why it is important for the 24-hour, seven-days-a-week vaccination rollout to happen is because it accelerates the number of people receiving the vaccine. We in City Hall have offered to help the Government in relation to events expertise, venues, premises and volunteers to take some of the pressure off the NHS. In Brent this week, what is really good is how the NHS was training up others to do some of this work. I saw a second-year medical student giving the injections and other practitioners as well. Also, we had volunteers doing the signing in and volunteers doing the logging in stuff.
Just to reassure you, Onkar, it is not just our hardworking NHS having to do even more. They are training others to help out as well, which is really important.

Onkar Sahota: Great. Thank you, MrMayor, for that. Thank you very much. Thank you to everyone who is contributing to the vaccination programme. Thank you.

Sadiq Khan: Hear, hear.

London’s economy in 2021

Leonie Cooper: In the context of Brexit and COVID, what is the outlook for London’s economy in 2021?

Sadiq Khan: GLA Economics published the latest version of London’s economic outlook on 7December [2020]. The central scenario assumed a free trade agreement with the European Union (EU) but did not assume a new national lockdown. A more pessimistic scenario assumed both further restrictions and a failure to agree a free trade agreement with the EU. The current best estimate is that the path of the London economy lies between these scenarios and that the outlook will not recover fully until 2022 or later. The central scenario estimated a gross value added (GVA) fall of 9.5% in 2020 followed by growth of 6.2% in 2021 and 6.9% in 2022. The lowest scenario estimated a GVA fall of 11.2% in 2020 followed by growth of 3.2% in 2021 and 8.2% in 2022.
The lockdown is necessary to protect Londoners and the NHS but it will inevitably have a negative impact on London’s economy and the trajectory of our ultimate recovery will be significantly affected by how long it lasts. In these hard times, I call on the Government to provide greater financial support to businesses and the self-employed. With business leaders, we have developed a roadmap for the reopening of London’s economy when the time comes.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor. The combination of the pandemic, lockdowns and Brexit is particularly difficult. You in your opening remarks said that we have effectively a no-deal Brexit for our financial services.
I have also now heard very worrying reports that the Government is considering taking away some of the
hard-won workers’ rights now that we have left the EU, including issues around the 48-hour working week and today very worrying indications that we may not give proper status to the EU’s ambassadorial representation in London.
I wondered if you would like to comment on both of those things and also on how your Good Work Standard might perhaps do something to counteract some of the problems that may arise from the watering down of workers’ rights. Thank you.

Sadiq Khan: You are articulating concerns that many Londoners have in relation to what is called a ‘race to the bottom’. I am not sure London’s future is a sort of Singapore on the Thames where we deregulate everything to allow us to compete better with our friends in the EU who have far more workers’ rights and have rules and regulations to make sure there are good standards in relation to food and in relation to a whole host of other issues as well.
The problem with what we have discovered this week is that there was a newspaper story saying the Government was considering reducing some of the rights that we had got through the EU, the Working Time Directive being one of them. The Government denied it and then - lo and behold - we got confirmation that the new Business Secretary is reviewing some of these rules.
The problem is that at the same time we are seeing us going into another recession, we are having a reduction of workers’ rights. That is why UnmeshDesai [AM] was right to raise the example of British Gas. What we are going to see across our city if we are not careful is more and more workers having their rights reduced and that is not the way to compete with our EU neighbours. It is far better to have higher-skilled, well-paid jobs in London and in our country to compete with rather than the alternative.

Unmesh Desai: Hear, hear.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you, MrMayor. One of the things that has also come up - certainly we have discussed this in the Economy Committee and I have talked to representatives from the City of London, London First and London & Partners - is the incredible pressure on London-based businesses. We really need to support them in light of the pandemic and of course in the light of Brexit.
What support is City Hall able to give and also the Government able to provide to deal with the new arrangements, particularly the non-tariff barriers that have just come in at such short notice?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, another good point. We are working closely with the business rep groups in London. Deputy Mayor for Business RajeshAgrawal is chairing a subgroup to deal with the recovery as well. The Business Hub is providing new facilities to advise businesses across London in relation to the new red tape placed upon them by this Government.
I would rather our Chancellor [of the Exchequer] spent less time on his brand and more time on the UK and London and us being able to compete with our competitors across the globe rather than him competing with [The Rt Hon] BorisJohnson [MP, Prime Minister] for the top job in the Government.

Léonie Cooper: I must say I do agree with that. I want to hear less about Eat Out to Help Out and more about somewhat more practical measures to help London’s businesses. Thank you very much, MrMayor. Thank you, Chair.

Cost of Living

Shaun Bailey: Are you satisfied that you have done all you can to reduce the of cost of living for Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: I have done all I can to reduce the cost of living for Londoners.
We have started more genuinely affordable homes than ever before and are on track to meet our target of 116,000 starts by March2023. Our £1billion investment has led to the most new council home starts in the capital since 1983. We have launched London Power to reduce energy costs. We have worked with employers to help them offer their staff interest-free loans for childcare and rental deposits. The Living Wage in London has risen to £10.85 an hour and there has been a 150% increase in the number of accredited Living Wage employers headquartered in London since I became Mayor to over 2,000.
Under the previous Mayor, fares increased by 42%, but I introduced the unlimited Hopper bus fare and froze TfL fares for five years, saving the average London household over £200. In the past year, the pandemic has hit our public finances hard and TfL fares revenue dropped by up to 90%. While the Government gave the private rail companies a bailout with no strings attached, it imposed requirements on TfL that seemed designed to hit the vulnerable the hardest. I managed to fight off proposals to scrap concessions for under-18s and over-60s and expanded the Congestion Charge Zone to the North and South Circular Roads.
To keep TfL running, I had to accept the Government’s requirement for fares to rise by the retail price index (RPI) plus 1% overall. To limit the impact of this, I have managed to keep some fares frozen.
The Government has told us also that we will have to put up council tax to fund TfL’s services. Some Government supporters predicted that council tax would go up by up to 21% but we have managed to limit the increase in council tax by an average of £2.63 a month from this April [2021].
With both fares and council tax, it is the same story. The Government is seeking to impose additional costs on Londoners while I do everything I can to limit the damage done to the cost of living. It is worth remembering that my political opponents consistently opposed my fares freeze, which has saved Londoners more in each of the last five years than the cost of the council tax increase.
I have also been asking the Government to make the £20 temporary increase to Universal Credit permanent and take further steps to ensure benefits cover the basic costs of living. I was disappointed that only six Conservative Members of Parliament voted to maintain the high level of Universal Credit in Parliament in a vote this Monday.

Shaun Bailey: Good morning, MrMayor, and thank you for your answer. You have said that council tax is regressive and affects the poorest most in London and so your very large council tax increase will hammer the poor across London. Will you reconsider this idea?

Sadiq Khan: The reason why we have to increase council tax is because the Government is forcing us to do so. There are three areas where it has forced us to do so.
The first area is in relation to policing. We know from previous experience that if we do not increase the council tax to the maximum the Government requires, in the following year it will reduce money from the police budget. In my first year as Mayor, one of the reasons given by the Home Secretary for reducing police funding was because in the previous year the previous Mayor had not increased council tax to the maximum precept.
The second area where we are forced to increase council tax is supporting the fire service. That is particularly important as we receive about 20% less money for the [London] Fire Brigade than the government thinks we should and also because of the consequences of both the Grenfell Tower fire and the problems with the built environment.
The third area where there has had to be an increase in council tax is because the Government has said it will refuse to support us by funding free travel for under-18s and will refuse to support us by funding free travel for over-60s. I am not willing to accede to Government demands to take those away. The only way the Government has allowed to pay for those is with one of two options: either to increase further the Congestion Charge or to increase council tax. I have chosen to keep those concessions and to introduce this council tax increase. There is no other option if we want to keep free travel for under-18s and over-60s.

Shaun Bailey: You have said that you will find £730million in savings from TfL. Why was this not done earlier? You could have addressed these things that way, but let me move on. You have‑‑

Sadiq Khan: Do you want me to respond to that point?

Shaun Bailey: By all means.

Sadiq Khan: Since I have become Mayor, for the first time in TfL’s history - it was formed in 2000 - the operating costs of TfL have gone down year on year. In 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020, each year, they have been going down. In the previous 16 years, they were going up. We have managed to reduce the deficit we have by more than £1billion as well and have managed to increase our cash balances. According to all independent experts, TfL has made a huge transformation over the last four or five years, something that as the Chair of TfL I am incredibly proud of.
On top of that, we are going to make more savings over the course of the next period, which we are required to do by the Government. The danger is that if we are not careful, it may lead to a reduction in services, which would be not the sensible thing to do as we come into recovery post-pandemic.

Shaun Bailey: Your proposed [Greater] London boundary charge is hugely unwelcome across London, particularly in the areas such as Hillingdon and Romford on the outskirts of London. Will you take into account residents’ views on the outskirts of London as this proposal moves forward?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, Chair, I always think it is important to correct errors made by Members when it comes to their questions. In relation to the Greater London charge, it is not my proposal to bring in this charge. This is one of the options the Government asked us to do in relation to further ways we could raise revenues.
The better option is for the Government to give London the £500million raised from Londoners through the vehicle excise duty (VED) or what is called the ‘road tax’. If the Government were to give us the money Londoners pay through VED, there would be no reason for this to be one of the options that the Financial Sustainability Report has put forward to the Government.
We will do this only if the Government requires us to do so. It is not a proposal from me. It is one of the options that TfL has put forward to the Government, as it asked us to do.

Shaun Bailey: If you had better control of London’s finances, you would not have to raise council tax by this much. You had a £58million increase in executive pay, a £151million‑‑

Sadiq Khan: Let me deal with each of those.

Navin Shah: A question, please.

Shaun Bailey: Excuse me?

Sadiq Khan: Shaun, let me deal with‑‑

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBailey, can we have a question, please?

Shaun Bailey: Yes, we will get to it. I stopped because the Mayor interjected. The point is that better control of London’s finances would really help you reduce the costs on Londoners rather than your immediate response to pass that on in a council tax rise.
Do you believe the triple whammy of a council tax raise, a boundary charge and an inflated Congestion Charge will have a massive negative effect on our recovering economy in London?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, it seems that [former United States President Donald] Trump may have gone but fake news has not. Let me address each of those points raised in the question from the Assembly Member. He really should know better. The Assembly Member has now been an Assembly Member for four years. He is not a novice anymore, I hope.
TfL relies upon fares from passengers to pay for its services. The fares box pays for 72% of our services. On top of that, we rely upon advertising revenues and, on top of that, property revenues. Roughly speaking, 86% comes from those three areas. I am surprised that the Assembly Member has not seen the impact on London’s economy caused by the pandemic. But for the pandemic, we would have had healthy income streams in all three of those areas: fares, property and advertising revenues.
All transit authorities across the country, including the privatised train operating companies, have seen massive falls in fares revenue. The Government gave the privatised train operating companies a blank cheque for 18 months but has not given TfL the same level of support. What it has said to TfL is, “We will give you short-term assistance on condition of doing a number of things”. One of the conditions is to increase the Congestion Charge to £15 seven days a week. Another condition is to remove free travel from under-18s and over-60s. For us to keep that free travel for under-18s and over-60s, a condition was that we had to increase council tax if we were not willing to increase the Congestion Charge even further.
It is really important - and I am sure in the course of the next 100 or so days, Chair, many of us will be reminding Londoners of this - for Londoners to be aware of who is responsible for an increase in a regressive tax, whether it is to pay for policing, to pay for transport or to pay for the fire service. I am not apologetic for wanting to make sure that we fund the police service, the fire service and transport, which is really important after ten years of cuts.

Shaun Bailey: Let us be clear, MrMayor. London’s poor financial situation is because of decisions you have made. You have been consistently warned about your profligate way of spending Londoners’ money. You were not told to make those changes. They have been‑‑

Sadiq Khan: That is just fake news, Chair. It is just a lie.

Shaun Bailey: They are decisions that are for you to make that you have --

Léonie Cooper: Where is the question? Where is the question?

Navin Shah: Please let me chair the meeting, thank you.

Shaun Bailey: They are decisions that you have made that you should regret. One last thing, MrMayor. It is very strange that you compare me to [Donald] Trump. Why?

Len Duvall: Because you are.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I have been asked a question.

Navin Shah: Look‑‑

Sadiq Khan: I have been asked a question.

Navin Shah: Carry on, MrMayor.

Sadiq Khan: If you look at the methods and devices used by DonaldTrump, both when he was a candidate and also when he won, you will see he used fake news, misinformation and misleading people. One of the big differences between you and DonaldTrump is that he won his election. You will not.

Shaun Bailey: I would like to suggest that maybe you are like Trump because you tell an awful lot of lies, MrMayor, an awful lot.

Sadiq Khan: Have your spin doctors honestly advised you that the best line of attack is to compare me to DonaldTrump?

Léonie Cooper: This is disgraceful. Where is the question in that?

Navin Shah: Can we get back to the questions and answers, please?

Shaun Bailey: Yes, we can. Over to you, Chair. Back to you. Thank you very much.

Navin Shah: Thank you. Can I also remind colleagues that I am chairing the meeting? I would appreciate that you allow me to have that control and conduct the meeting in a proper, orderly fashion.
I have two indications in terms of supplementary questions, MrMayor, to you. First, I invite AssemblyMemberDuvall followed by AssemblyMemberPrince. Thank you.

Len Duvall: That was an incredulous bit of questioning there, MrMayor. Would you accept that there are wide-ranging measures that can help to support people, particularly the poor, around the cost of living? You have made the case for what you have done in that sense, but would you not say that the previous questioner would have more credibility if he had been speaking up for Londoners on free school meals and the Government fiasco over that and on issues around the concession passes? If he wanted to help the poor in terms of the cost of living, he could do that. You were very right to point out the tactics.
Really, MrMayor, my second part of the question very quickly is this. Conservatives in particular - and particularly in this group - speak about helping the poor on one issue when it is about you and forget about it with the Government and then make excuses to help the poor. This is a quote I want to give you to reflect on. I know you would never say this, but the previous questioner did,
“The key thing about poverty and poor people is that poverty is as much about a mindset as it is about money. If you give poor people lots of money, they buy things, not always what they need, and they buy what you want.”
That is the excuse that they do not do some of the things you have done in protecting some of the most vulnerable people in London and trying to support them in these hard times.
Is that generally correct around the range of issues, particularly where Government interventions could be helpful in supporting Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: I find those comments attributed to a Member of this Assembly offensive and I am more than happy to give him the opportunity to apologise or even say he has made a U-turn and has changed his mind. Even that would be something that I am sure all of us would welcome. His silence speaks volumes. We can only infer from his silence when he has the opportunity now to respond to his comments that he still believes that. Anybody who still believes that is unfit not only to be the Mayor but to be a Member of this Assembly.

Navin Shah: All right. AssemblyMemberPrince, do you want to‑‑

Keith Prince: Could I give way to AssemblyMemberBailey first, who has been named?

Navin Shah: If he wants to reply. He has not indicated he wants to reply.

Shaun Bailey: I have indicated, Chair.

Len Duvall: Does he want to apologise?

Shaun Bailey: I have indicated, Chair.

Navin Shah: OK. Then please ask your question.

Shaun Bailey: First and foremost, in you, Mayor, we have someone who constantly shifts the blame, never takes responsibility‑‑

Sadiq Khan: Why do you not respond to Len’s point?

Shaun Bailey: I am responding to his point.

Sadiq Khan: Do you accept those comments or do you apologise for them and make a U-turn?

Shaun Bailey: If you let me answer, MrMayor, I will answer. In you, we have someone who constantly shifts the blame and never takes responsibility. My comments come from 20-plus years of working with some of the hardest --

Sadiq Khan: You maintain those comments?

Navin Shah: Look‑‑

Léonie Cooper: He is not apologising. Unbelievable.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBailey‑‑

Sadiq Khan: He maintains those comments, Chair. He still believes that about poorer people.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBailey, you were named and so I am giving you an opportunity if you want to take up that particular point. If not, I would like to go back to questions and answers, please.

Len Duvall: What is your position now?

Shaun Bailey: Thank you, Chair. I would love to do that if Members and the Mayor stop intervening. All right. As I was saying‑‑

Navin Shah: Look, you have been asked to apologise.

Shaun Bailey: No, as I was saying, Chair, I have worked with Londoners in tough positions for over 20 years of my professional life, people who are drug-addicted, people who are crime-involved and gang-related. When those comments were made, they were very relevant to the people I am dealing with. I, unlike the Mayor, take responsibility for the people around me. I, unlike the Mayor, am not busy trying to pass the buck.
The Mayor was not forced to make these decisions. He has decided to make these decisions and has hidden them behind sweet words. Ultimately, he was not forced to raise council tax. He decided to raise council tax. That was a decision the Mayor took on his own.

Len Duvall: Untrue, untrue.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBailey, thank you. You have made your statement. You obviously have not taken up the request to apologise. We will move on.

Shaun Bailey: Why should I?

Sadiq Khan: I am sorry, Chair. Chair, with respect‑‑

Shaun Bailey: Why should the Mayor ask me to apologise when I understand some of these communities far more than he ever will. He is hidden in his ivory tower. I have been on the streets dealing with people.

Léonie Cooper: Chair, this is not a question.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBailey‑‑

Shaun Bailey: I say to the Mayor, “Get out of your ivory tower and do your job. Come and see people who are really suffering”.

Léonie Cooper: For goodness sake.

Shaun Bailey: You have your Members piling behind you to try to make you look good. You are not helping Londoners. You are not doing what is required.

Léonie Cooper: No one can make you look good.

Navin Shah: AssemblyMemberBailey, you had enough opportunity.

Shaun Bailey: Thank you, Chair.

Navin Shah: MrMayor, I will give you a minute at the most if you want - a lot has been said in that statement - if you want to come back for about a minute.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, no need. I am just making sure that we have recorded what he said.

Navin Shah: All right. Thank you. AssemblyMemberPrince?

Net loss of council homes

Siân Berry: Will London soon be turning a corner in terms of the net loss of council homes?

Sadiq Khan: Building more council housing is one of my top priorities as Mayor. In 2018, I released over £1billion to councils through my landmark Building Council Homes for Londoners Programme. Last year, councils started over 4,390 new homes in London, of which 3,300 were supported by City Hall, the highest number since 1983. I am proud of the success of this programme and the hard work of boroughs.
My new £4billion Affordable Homes Programme will provide even further critical investment for new council homes in London. However, the evidence shows London’s housing sector needs significantly more grant, £4.9billion per year for the next ten years, to meet the capital’s level of affordable housing need. I am calling for the Government to step up and provide this investment.
With the number of new council homes growing year on year, there is now only a slight decline in the overall stock of council housing in London, last year by less than 0.1%, representing the smallest decline since 1991 when records began. I am hopeful that my policies combined with the ambition and hard work of boroughs will see this small decline turn into an increase for the first time in 30 years.
I am doing everything I can to make this happen. My new London Plan requires that any existing council homes lost to demolition are replaced by new housing at an existing or higher density with at least the equivalent level of floor space. The introduction of my 2018 Good Practice Guide to Estate Regeneration ensures that where GLA funding is sought, future demolitions only happen with the support of affected residents. Over time, the combined impact of these policies should ensure demolitions do not need to a further reduction of council housing stock in the capital.
However, it is clear that we are swimming against the tide of national Government policies that hamper the efforts of councils to build homes. The Government’s right-to-buy policy is a major impediment to the sustained growth of council homes in London. It is clear that one-for-one replacements are not being achieved in London or elsewhere as a result of unfair restrictions placed on councils’ use of right-to-buy receipts to fund new homes. If, like us, the Government is serious about providing the homes Londoners need, it must remove these unnecessary restrictions to ensure boroughs can build at a rate that matches their ambition.

Siân Berry: Thank you very much, MrMayor. We both have the same goal in mind here, which is more council homes. That is what Londoners need. It is good to see the increase in council house building since 2016. That is progress, but it does not mean London has turned a corner in terms of the net loss of council homes on the ground. That is my topic today.
To track what is happening on the ground, I put out a report last week that talked about the planning pipeline, but today I have compiled data from the stock returns from councils. These have the overall numbers, plus information on new builds, acquisitions, demolitions, selloffs and right-to-buys. Adding them up, we get the net change. We are still seeing every year council homes being lost in London, more than are being built or acquired.
One of the biggest components of the net loss is, as you would expect, as you have mentioned, right-to-buy. Last year, up to 2020, nearly 1,500 homes were lost that way in London. Starting with someone we can agree on, what can we do about this together? Can we push the Government harder for not just fewer restrictions on what to do with the funding we get from right-to-buy but an emergency suspension of right-to-buy? That would turn the numbers around in one go.

Sadiq Khan: It would not because you are not increasing the supply of new homes. All you are doing is stopping people from fulfilling an aspiration to be a homeowner. It is a far more effective way to be a homeowner than other forms.
We need to do a number of things. First, we need to make sure it is meaningful in relation to like-for-like replacement. That means giving councils more ability to use their receipts from the sale of council homes to build new homes. That means increasing the supply. Since 1979 when right-to-buy first began up until recently, for every five homes sold only one was built.
I accept that we are shrinking the number of social homes and council homes available and that is why, since I became Mayor, we have started to increase the number of council homes being built. You have seen the policies in relation to estate regeneration, but we really urgently need to increase the numbers of council homes available. That is why I continue to lobby the Government in relation to the money it gives us so that we can use it for the sorts of homes that Londoners need rather than other sorts of homes that Londoners do not necessarily need as much.

Siân Berry: OK. I am surprised to hear you back right-to-buy quite so strongly there. My second question is about the other major contributor to the losses that are in the data returns. This is demolitions. They are not stopping. Your new policies are not yet coming into effect. Last year, on the ground, the stock returns show 1,700 demolitions versus only 946 new builds. Overall, we now have a net loss of council homes last year of 3,600. That is an increase on the previous year.
I have to raise the alarm. When we get the 2020 housing association data through in May, their new builds will not outweigh the lost council homes. We might see an overall net loss in social housing.
My question to you is: what more can we do? What emergency measures can you take to get more social housing into new-build projects now to make up for this loss?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, I am not sure I accept those figures but I am sure that is just a question of dates, not because your figures are not accurate. The figures I have show that the number of council homes demolished is far less than council homes started.
That is one of the reasons we have policies in place now both in the London Plan and in relation to funding. The London Plan is quite clear. If councils, for good reason when it comes to regeneration, want to demolish homes, they must replace each home lost with at least one new home but often more. That is why I referred to density. Secondly, if it is the wish of anybody to receive funding from the GLA when it comes to estate regeneration, there must be an affirmative ballot of those residents living on an estate before regeneration can take place.

Siân Berry: I support those policies, MrMayor. I am really sorry. I am running out of my time now. I need to leave some for my colleague. I will keep talking to you about this. If I can send you the data, that will probably clarify things for you as well.

Sadiq Khan: As ever, we are on the same side of the argument here. It is a question of how we get to the end. I am more than happy to work with the Member, who is very constructive on these issues.

Siân Berry: Thank you.

New Years’ Fireworks Display

Peter Whittle: Is the Mayor happy with the public’s response to his New Years’ fireworks display?

Sadiq Khan: I am incredibly pleased with the public’s heartfelt response to the New Year’s fireworks, drone and laser display. 2020 was one of the most challenging years in living memory for both our city and the country as a whole. I am very pleased that whilst we could not gather together as we usually would to welcome in the new year, we were able to help the public unite from the comfort of their own homes through this spectacular show. The eyes of the world turned to landmarks across our capital to reflect on the defining moments of 2020 and look in hope to the new year. This included paying tribute to our NHS heroes, who continue to work tirelessly to save lives, and heroes like Captain [Sir]TomMoore, who lifted our spirits and helped to raise millions of pounds for the NHS.
It also included recognising the importance and impact of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement on millions of people’s lives. Racism continues to affect the lives of many Londoners and we have all seen this year how COVID disproportionately impacted people from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities. I am glad we could show that London always stands together against racism.
There were a record-breaking 19million views of the show live, with more than 39million views overall. The public’s reaction, whether from London, from across the country or from around the world, has been overwhelmingly positive. Londoners have always stood together in the face of adversity. I was very pleased that we could reflect how this spirit carried on through 2020.

Peter Whittle: Thank you for your answer, MrMayor. A belated happy new year to you, too.
Can I ask a couple of questions to begin with? Can you confirm that the amount of taxpayers’ money used on the fireworks was, as has been reported, £1.5million?

Sadiq Khan: I do not have the exact figure, but that sounds about right. I can send the Assembly Member the accurate figure once we have that in.

Peter Whittle: Thank you. Also, is it correct that you had final sign-off on the display even though it was done with the BBC?

Sadiq Khan: Yes.

Peter Whittle: I see. MrMayor, my problem is this. A lot of people tuned into the fireworks, like I did, only to be terribly disappointed by the politicisation of what should be, basically, a very uniting and harmless event, ie fireworks at the end of the year and at the beginning of the year. What happened is that they were confronted with, as you mentioned there, BLM. They were confronted with the very recognisable symbol now of the BLM movement.
MrMayor, this movement believes in defunding the police. It believes in deconstructing the family, history and capitalism. Why did you celebrate it?

Sadiq Khan: The AssemblyMember is in danger of confusing individual organisations with a movement and the causes behind the movement.
What the movement is about in this country in particular is about highlighting and fighting against the racism, inequality and discrimination that still exists particularly against black people. Over the course of the last year, one of the defining moments was the horrible killing of GeorgeFloyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the United States. That is what has led to a groundswell of Londoners and people across the country coming together, uniting against racism, inequality and discrimination. That is what it is about, not the other issues he has referred to.

Peter Whittle: MrMayor, that is disingenuous of you. The BLM movement, as it was celebrated with that fist in the middle of a fireworks display, has very particular aims which they are very clear about. They are not resiling from them. They are very clear about them. I am surprised that certainly, for example, as the chief policeman in London, you would agree or celebrate a group that believes the police should be defunded.
Can I ask you this? When you worked out the display, did you know that BLM had in October [2020] already applied to become a political party?

Sadiq Khan: Again, he is in danger of conflating individual organisations with the movement and the cause. I am quite clear. One of the defining moments of 2020 was the world uniting against racism, inequality and discrimination against black people all across the globe, including in London. I am not apologetic at all for being antiracist. I am not apologetic at all for being a supporter and an ally of the BLM movement.

Peter Whittle: I am not surprised, MrMayor, but the implication that somehow or other to be antiracist you have to support the BLM movement is one that I reject. It is absolutely not true. The point is that this movement has applied and is still being considered to be a party and so you could end up facing them in the forthcoming election.
Can I say also one thing? You talked about the images you used in this display. No display should have images that basically divide people, anyway, but one of the most important images of last year was the desecrated statute of [SirWinston] Churchill. It was everywhere. It happened during a BLM demonstration.

Navin Shah: Can you ask your question, please?

Peter Whittle: MrMayor, do you think it might have been a more healing thing to have had an image, for example, of that statue but not desecrated?

Sadiq Khan: I agree that the statue of Churchill is really important and it is really important that it is not desecrated. It is really important that there is not graffiti or vandalism taking place of WinstonChurchill’s - or others’ - statue. He was our great wartime leader. He was the leader of our country and the allies in defeating fascism across the globe. I am really proud that there is his statue in Parliament Square. It is really important that we do everything we can to protect that statue. That is why the police took the steps they did last year to protect the statue. All of us should be outspoken in our views in relation to making sure we stand up to anybody who thinks it is okay to denigrate the statute of WinstonChurchill.

Peter Whittle: That would have been a very good way to have maybe illustrated that point by putting it in the display instead of the BLM logo. Anyway, my time is up, MrMayor. Thank you.

Sadiq Khan: Thank you.